Fresh Start for Fresh Water Clean-up Fund Quarterly Report Covering the period 1 January to 31 March 2015 Project Name: Wainono Restoration Project Date: 30/04/2015 VERSION: Draft 1 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
Introduction What is this report for? This template has been collaboratively developed by the Ministry for the Environment and the Clean-up Fund project teams with the aim of producing efficient and informative report templates that work for both the project teams and the Ministry. This quarterly report gives the opportunity to recipients of the Clean-up Fund to record and communicate to interested parties, including the Ministry for the Environment, funding partners and the wider public, the progress made on their project, along with any significant risks, issues and/or health & safety matters encountered, and stakeholder engagement undertaken. The report provides the Ministry for the Environment with information on how the delivery phase of the project is going. The reports are a key source of information for updates to the Minister and the Ministry s website on the progress of projects funded through the fresh Start for Fresh Water Cleanup Fund. The different sections in this report serve different purposes. The Project Overview and key facts section presents a snapshot of what has been happening in the project this quarter, and is particularly useful for situations where high-level reporting is required (e.g., strategy/ governance group meetings, preparing fact sheets for the Minister on the progress of freshwater projects). The rest of the report provides a more in depth understanding of the project progress. This is a useful recording tool for the project team and any other involved parties for assessing what has been achieved to date and what is ahead, as well as providing robust information whenever the project comes under scrutiny. Finally, the Declaration section provides assurance to the Ministry that the regional council recognises its accountability for the information provided, which may be requested by interested parties beyond the Ministry. 2 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
When your report is complete Quarterly reports should be submitted by the dates agreed in your funding deed, unless otherwise discussed with your Clean-up Fund Analyst. Email the completed report to your Clean-up Fund Analyst. Alternatively, you can post these to: Remediation Projects Team Clean-up Fund Ministry for the Environment PO Box 10362 Wellington 6143. What happens next? Your Clean-up Fund Analyst will assess the report to ensure that you have met the requirements for funding as specified in your funding deed. During your Clean-up Fund Analyst s review of the report, further information may be requested. 3 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
1. Project Overview and key facts Implementation of the project actions continues as we experience good ground conditions for the earthworks. The drought this year has delayed further planting work but fortunately most of the initial plantings undertaken in the previous quarter have survived. Spending is behind budget and we are unlikely to complete all of the on ground work by the end of June. However funds will be committed in contract to projects by this time. Implementation of contracted works will continue, but the rate of progress will be governed by soil conditions and farming operations as we approach wetter months. Sediment mitigation works Work has progressed on several properties including further work on the main stem of the Hook River. Low flows in streams has mean that we are largely working in completely dry stream beds which simplifies operations by not needing temporary diversions in most situations. We have been required to use a chainsaw felling crew to remove vegetation ahead of the earthworks proceeding to avoid health and safety risks and damage to machinery. This has delayed some work due to contractor availability. As most of the trees to be removed are willows, the felling is particularly hazardous (willows are prone to splitting and springing under tension) and this has meant that only contractors with the appropriate qualifications, equipment and health and safety procedures could be used. Some of the work involved felling from top down requiring tree climbing qualifications and equipment. This has added costs and delays to some of the work. The availability of suitable rock armouring material has also been an issue. Competition between contractors led to one earthworks operator not being able to source material from our usual supplier who has somewhat of a monopoly on supply in the area. It took some time to find an alternative source that was suitable material and close enough to the site. An alternative has now been found and we will have ongoing supply to avoid this being an issue in the future. The material from the new site is particularly good for some situations as it comes in large slab formations that can be split to suit the job in hand. While contractors are becoming more familiar with the requirements of the work, the amount of time that needs to be spend on site is still significant. Often additional visits are made as land owners become more aware of the implications of the work as it occurs and request minor changes. The most publicly visible works to date commenced in this quarter and this work has generated a lot of conversation in the community and enquiries to the landowner as to what is going on. This site adjoins the main highway and the nature of the work and the heavy machinery have attracted a lot of interest. The most common comment seems to have been along the lines of I wish I could get that done on my place mate which is really positive to hear. Water quality monitoring Monitoring has continued throughout the Hook catchment but many of the sites have been dry so samples cannot be taken. Of note is that project staff and members of the public observed mass fish deaths in the lagoon itself where numerous flounder were seen floating on the surface or washed up on the shore. This has been observed before, and is most likely to be due to low oxygen levels in the lagoon being exacerbated by high water temperatures and reduction inflows due to the drought. Shallow water bodies are prone to these occurrences but they are likely to be more frequent and more severe where the water quality is poor as with Wainono. The fish mortality seems to have been a short term event as the observations have not persisted. Canterbury Mudfish The protection of a significant new population of Canterbury mudfish is imminent as negotiations with the landowner near completion. This previously undetected population was found in the course of our farm surveys and was prioritised for protection due to the abundance of mudfish found across a range of age classes. As the landowner is converting from deer farming to beef in the near future, fencing costs are much reduced from initial scenarios and should enable the project to be more affordable for the landowner and the project. As the site is in the upper reaches of a stable tributary it has the potential to seed new populations down stream of replenish existing ones. 4 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
Farm Environment Plans The template that has been used for our farm environment plans continues to evolve and has had further changes made to reflect suggestions made by an assessment panel made up of Regional Council specialists and industry representatives. The Hook catchment steering group has also promoted changes that make the template more readable and streamlined. Environment Canterbury Land Management Advisors and project staff continue to work on these plans with individual farmers and the process is being well received. Engineering Work for the Hook Delta Wetlands Engineering work has yet to be completed for sediment trap works in the Hook delta wetlands. The surveying work completed last quarter did not provide sufficient elevation data for part of the site and further work is needed. This coupled with the engineer being called to give expert witness evidence for an environment court case will further delay the completion of this work. We are proceeding with preliminary site work but cannot progress the consenting process until engineering work is completed. Community We have been developing signage and interpretation material in consultation with Waihao Rūnanga, the Waimate District Council, Ministry for Primary Industries and the Department of Conservation. This will pull together not only the physical communication material but also the messages they present. A landscape architect has been engaged to design the structures that will hold the material and these will be built with recycled hardwood timbers from the old Waihao box and Bradshaw s bridge. Using these materials will visually brand the sites as part of the restoration project and will also provide a useful cultural heritage link with the history of water management around the lagoon. As part of the project we were pursuing the use of phone apps that provide locally triggered content that can be linked to the interpretation media on site however it has been decided not to go further with this until the technology and its potential are better embedded. 5 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
2. Milestone Table Please provide information on the progress of milestones for the past quarter. As per the Annual Plan, please identify: the milestones scheduled to be progressed this quarter; the activities or interventions scheduled to be undertaken this quarter towards achieving the milestone and their scheduled completion date; the activities status and any new forecasted completion date if the activities are on-going/delayed; the progress (in summary) of the activities scheduled this quarter, including tangible achievements. Scheduled Milestone Scheduled Activities Scheduled completion date for activities 1. Develop and maintain project support and relationships with stakeholders. Integrate Land Water Regional Planning (LWRP) planning implications. Catchment group establishment and maintenance Re-measure perception survey Ongoing Ongoing June 2015 Activities Status: complete or or on-going/delayed new completion date On track On track Delayed, completion date now June 30 2015. Progress summary on activities (incl. tangible achievements) Our Farm Environment Template has been reviewed and now meets the requirements of the LWRP Sub-regional plan produced and now published for submissions Catchment steering group performing well as a conduit for project implementation and planning process information Perception survey delayed to allow for the result to reflect further work in the last quarter 2. Complete investigations to inform management decisions. Complete fish habitat assessment and management planning Complete fish passage remediation actions December 2014 Nov 2015 Delayed, expect completion June 2015. Delayed. Expect completion December 2015 Field work and data assessment completed. Report has been significantly delayed due to family health issues being experienced by our consultant Leanne O Brien A number of remediation actions have been completed in the course of the sediment control activities 6 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
Date revised in line planning delays identified. We are undertaking contingency planning with the Working Waters Trust to ensure that this work can be completed post June 30th 4. Survey farms using modified Riparian Management Classification (RMC) assessment protocol. Undertake surveys January 2015 Delayed, expect completion March 2015 Desk top and on ground surveys continue. Some work is prioritised by the knock on effect from one property to the next, e.g. improving flow paths on an upstream property will affect the downstream neighbour 5. Undertake sediment control implementation. Stock exclusion fencing Riparian planting Stream bank battering Construction of sediment traps and detention bunds June 2015 On-going/delayed 4.5 kilometres of stream battering completed this quarter 11 sediment traps completed this quarter 10 detention bunds completed Major gravel removal and bed modification completed in the main stem of the Hook River No fencing completed this quarter No planting completed this quarter 7 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
3. Evaluation of Significant Risks Please provide details on significant project risks updated for this quarter and how they are managed. Rate the risk (low, moderate, severe) based on the probability of the risk occurring and the severity of impact on the project. A significant risk is an event or a situation that may occur and impact on the completion of the project or cause the project to fail. Risk Date raised Consequence Rating Strategy to mitigate Status Outcomes/comments Changes in landowner support for project due to sub-regional planning implications Dec 2013 Reduced success in accessing farms and negotiating funding agreements and contributions Moderate Improve understanding of implications Develop communication responses Open While this is still a potential issue, we have not experienced any access issues due to this process. There is tension and caution present in some discussions however. As the subregional plan is now published for submission and its implications will be made clearer, this risk may still have a bearing on project outcomes. Extensive areas of exposed soil during project works October 2014 Sediment discharge during rain events Moderate Sow in grass as soon as earthworks completed. Stagger work across several months Open Grass strike has improved with recent rain fall and we continue to sow works as soon practicable after completion. A new seed mix using plantain and cocksfoot is being tried as this will provided faster cover growth in cooler months. Land owners are expressing concern about the risk of continuing works into the traditionally wetter months. We are aware of this risk and it may mean that we suspend work in areas where this risk would have the greatest consequence. Reduced dairy pay-out prediction October 2014 More difficult negotiating environment for Moderate Remain aware of issue facing landowners and communicate accordingly Open We continue to see reduced pay outs and predictions for the dairy sector and this has a knock on to cropping 8 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
causing greater spending caution agreements and contributions and dairy support operations. We have yet to encounter changes in landowner intentions or support due to this risk. 4. Evaluation of Significant Issues Please provide details on significant project issues updated for this quarter and how they are managed. Rate the issue (low, moderate, severe) based on the severity of impact on the project. A significant issue is an event or a situation that has occurred and could or has impacted on the completion of the project or cause the project to fail. Issue Date raised Consequence Rating Strategy to mitigate Status Outcomes/comments Engineering work repeatedly delayed (See budget underspend comments for further detail) 30/04/2015 Not completing works in the project timeframe High We have proceeded with site preparation work that does not need prior engineering work or consents but are otherwise unable to mitigate for this. This work is an integral part of the project in that it will manage one of the most significant sediment pathways to the lagoon. Open To be discussed with MfE. We will continue to progress work quickly as possible and as water levels and soil conditions permit. Implementation works significantly behind budget schedule, activities may 03/04/2015 Not completing works in the project timeframe High Open To be discussed with MfE. 9 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
need to be suspended if water levels and soil conditions prevent earthworks. 10 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
5. Health and Safety Do your systems meet requirements of Health & Safety Act? Yes No Please describe any new hazard that is not covered in your health & safety management plan and/or serious health and safety issue(e.g. boat capsized and volunteer nearly drown) that have occurred this quarter; their impact (real or potential); their mitigation, if any; significant amendments to your health &safety management plan; and any comments you think are relevant. Hazard/issue identified Impact Mitigation No new hazards identified for this quarter significant amendments to the health &safety plan Comments 11 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
6. Change Register Please provide information on significant change requests. What changes occurred to the Annual Plan this quarter? Have they been approved and implemented? Who were they approved by and when? Was the Ministry for the Environment consulted? A significant change is defined as any change that will result in an aggregate increase or decrease in cost of $50,000 or greater to the relevant project costs as originally set out in the project work programme or annual plan, or in changes to the key outcomes of the programme. Description of Change Reason Impact Comment Approval date Approved by MfE consulted No changes sought 12 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
7. Evaluation of Financials Project Tasks Total from Annual Plan 3rd 1/4 Planned Target 3rd 1/4 Actual 2nd 1/4 Variance 3rd 1/4 Variance 4th 1/4 Planned target 4th 1/4 Total Comment 1. Community integration via catchment groups and subregional planning 2. Complete investigations to inform management decisions $10,899 $3,132 $3,799 $1,132 ($667) $3,899 $3,232 $20,000 $20,000 $3,842 ($2,671) $16,158 $0 $16,158 Slightly over budget. Additional hours required to modify Farm Environment Plan template after panel review Fish passage remediation to date has been completed simultaneously with sediment control (pitched culvert repair, scour pool barriers) and costs cannot be meaningfully separated. Final recommendation report from consultant still pending. 3. Establish baseline monitoring for indicator species and habitats $39,000 $11,000 $11,998 ($96) ($998) $8,000 $7,002 Slightly over budget with additional staff hours used for eel monitoring. 4. Farm surveys to identify and prioritise actions 5. Sediment control implementation $6,000 $2,000 $2,181 $3,888 ($181) $0 $0 $1,116,000 $325,000 $135,875 ($201) $189,125 $401,000 $590,125 Slightly over budget, Re-survey of site due to implications of upstream works that change stream capacity affecting downstream property. This output is significantly behind budget. *See explanatory comments below Operating total $1,191,899 $360,000 $157,695 $2,052 $203,437 $412,899 $616,517 13 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
Explanatory comments for budget underspend An accumulation of factors has led to a significant underspend for the main implementation outputs of this project. Severe drought conditions from November through to April have meant that no riparian planting works have been undertaken since September. While most of the species for planting are quite hardy, the total lack of soil moisture would have meant very high failure rates. Irrigation of the planting sites is not practicable. Hook delta sediment control ($80,000 phased for 3 rd quarter) works have been repeatedly delayed due to consultant availability. We cannot proceed with consents or operations for this work until the engineering work is completed. The consultant chosen for this work is a specialist in the area of river morphology and sediment management and has many years of local experience with this type of work. Despite the delays, for this reason and the fact that the work had commenced, we did not want to change service providers. He is currently involved as an expert witness for ongoing Environment Court hearings and the demands and timing of this are largely out of his control. The preliminary engineering work has been completed and drawings pending, however consent timeframes and river conditions will dictate progress on this work. Large scale drainage realignment and wetland enhancement work was planned for lake margin areas recently acquired by the Waimate District Council. However the gazettal and title transfer of this land was stalled on a technicality by the previous landowner due to ongoing grievance with the Council, effectively suspending the land parcels in an undetermined legal state. The land was procured as part of a legal settlement when the land owner was prosecuted under the RMA. This has prevented legal access to the site so none of the proposed work site has commenced. This land provides opportunities to treat priority drainage tributaries that cannot otherwise be managed so the option of doing alternative works with the funds proposed for this site has not been pursued. We have been informed that full title transfer has now occurred, so can now begin this work. Availability of suitable rock armouring material has delayed work at some sites at the head of the south branch of the Hook River. Commercial competition between earthmoving contractors has limited the supply of this material as one operator has control of the main quarries that are within economic transport distance of the project. As some land owners have preferences for the contractors they use, and these operators could not source the material from the usual supplier, there were delays in finding a suitable alternative. Such a supply has now been found and work has progressed at these sites. This issue had not been anticipated as the level of controlling interests in the supply were not known. In general terms the implementation work is slower to deliver than anticipated. The time that needs to be spent with landowners and contractors on site for work that is underway, prevents the required planning, administration and liaison occurring for the next body of work to be progressed. As works proceed on site, often landowners only then discover implications of the work that needs to be addressed. These have all been relatively minor adjustments to things like fence lines, tree removal and gravel deposition but none the less require a site visit, land owner and contractor management time. The implications of farming operations has also caused delays in the surveying and implementation work for some properties. Some of the issue is that the land owners are unavailable to meet to go over proposals, but at other times it has been access limitations due to stock or cropping activities. 14 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
8. Evaluation of Communication and Engagement Provide information on your communication and engagement mechanisms. How do you keep stakeholders informed? How often do you need to engage with them to keep them informed? How easy was it to keep them informed? What positive/negative feedback have you received from them? Stakeholder Engagement mechanism Frequency What s covered Stakeholders Feedback Comments Waihao Rūnanga Catchment group meetings Monthly All issues, cultural focus Good feedback, well engaged Rūnanga meetings but more with project Direct contact with broadly involved irrigation scheme individuals also. Sub-regional planning processes Landowners One on one As required Operational Generally good, Hook catchment Monthly detail farmers pleased to group meetings As required by Planning issues be involved and Sub-regional process keen to see the planning process work done, caution about their 15 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t contributions Positive comments about how the work is turning out Concerns expressed about the functioning of the Waihao Box lagoon level Ongoing conversations with regard to project activities and implications of Hunter Downs Recent engagement regarding Waihao Rūnanga application to the Te Mana o Te Wai fund Land are provided for carpark will require designation as road reserve to fall within Waimate District Council maintenance funding. This has been successfully negotiated with the land owner. Hook Catchment steering group is proving to be a good forum for getting better communication going beyond the project activities and we are getting insights into how to make some of our organisation s processes more effective and easier for land owners to navigate This is not part of the Wainono project but has implications for project outcomes. These concerns will be forwarded to Environment Canterbury s
management structure River Engineering Section DOC Zone Committee meetings Waimate District Council General public Arranged ongoing meetings and operational communications Via District Planner Zone Committee meetings/reps Zone Committee meetings/reps Monthly As required As required Monthly Broader context and summary updates Operational issues Operational issues Broader context and summary updates Monthly Broader context and summary updates DOC are keen to get more involved with the Wainono Lagoon Restoration Project now that their new organisational structure, staff roles and funding environment are embedded Good feedback on completed works General support continues with Positive meeting held in March with DOC Partnerships and operational staff Collaborations underway with weed control, signage and communications work WDC providing materials and site agreements for public access areas WDC lake margin lands now gazetted and agreed that work can proceed Newsletter to be produced in January with website update 9. Lessons Learned What key lessons have you learned while implementing the project over the last quarter? Please provide a context to the lesson learned (what event or situation triggered the lesson learned), the mitigation undertaken if any, the impact the event or situation had on the project. Finally, state what you might do differently or keep doing in the future as a result Date Topic Context Impact Mitigation, if any Lessons learned Comments 16 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
30/04/2015 Staff time Complexity of work means large amount of contact time required with contractors and landowners once work proceeds Delays in progressing outputs n/a The main learning is being more conservative with regard to expenditure estimates and allowing greater time for contractor management. While the time on site is often relatively short, when combined with travel time additional site visits impact significantly on time available to forward other work. 17 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
10. Additional Information 18 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t
Declaration As a duly authorised representative of the organisation: I declare that to the best of my knowledge, the information contained in all sections of this quarterly report, or supplied by us in support of our quarterly report, is complete, true and correct. I declare that I have the authority to sign this quarterly report and to provide this information. I understand that information presented to the Minister for the Environment and Ministry for the Environment is subject to disclosure under the Official Information Act 1982. Name Kennedy Lange Position Signature Project Manager Kennedy Lange Date: 30/04/2015 by typing your name in the space provided you are electronically signing this quarterly report. 19 P a g e Q u a r t e r l y R e p o r t